Los Angeleshttp://www.newgeography.com/category/story-topics/urban-issues/los-angeles
The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.enGo East, Young Southern California Workershttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004845-go-east-young-southern-california-workers
<p>Do the middle class and working class have a future in the Southland? If they do, that future will be largely determined in the Inland Empire, the one corner of Southern California that seems able to accommodate large-scale growth in population and jobs. If Southern California&rsquo;s economy is going to grow, it will need a strong Inland Empire.</p>
<p>The calculation starts with the basics of the labor market. Simply put, Los Angeles and Orange counties mostly have become too expensive for many middle-skilled workers. The Riverside-San Bernardino area has emerged as a key labor supplier to the coastal counties, with upward of 15 percent to 25 percent of workers commuting to the coastal counties.</p>
<p>In a <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/files/Housing-The-Future-Inland-Empire-National-CORE.pdf">new report recently released</a> by <a href="http://nationalcore.org/">National Core</a>, a Rancho Cucamonga nonprofit that develops low-income housing, I and my colleagues, demographer Wendell Cox and analyst Mark Schill, explored the challenges facing the region. <!--break--> Although we found many reasons for concern, the region&rsquo;s overall condition and its long-term prospects may be better than many might suspect.</p>
<p><strong>Population trends</strong></p>
<p>The region&rsquo;s once-explosive growth has slowed considerably. From 1945-2010, the area&rsquo;s population soared from 265,000 to 4.25 million. Already the nation&rsquo;s 12th-largest metropolitan area, the I.E. could pass San Francisco and Boston by 2020 (unless faster-growing Phoenix does so first).</p>
<p>Yet, contrary to expectations (and, perhaps, hope among anti-sprawl campaigners), the area continues to be a beacon for people from the rest of the region. There is a notion, widely expressed in the mainstream media, that Southern California&rsquo;s growth will now focus more on the urban core around Downtown Los Angeles. Yet, as is often the case, what planners and pundits desire is not widely shared by the vast majority of people.</p>
<p>People continue to vote for the Inland Empire – and other peripheral areas – with their feet. Census Bureau data indicates that, from 2007-11, nearly 35,000 more residents moved from Los Angeles County to the Inland Empire than moved in the other direction. There was also a net movement of more than 9,000 from Orange County and more than 4,000 net migration from San Diego County.</p>
<p>Several long-standing demographic trends favor a continued shift to the Inland region, according to Cox and Schill. Immigrants and their offspring may prove the critical factor. Over the past decade, the Inland region dramatically increased its population of foreign-born residents, more than three times the number and at nearly 18 times the rate of the coastal counties.</p>
<p>The influx of immigrants and their children is largely responsible for the region&rsquo;s relatively young population, compared with the rest of Southern California. As recently as 2000, the proportion of population ages 5-14 in Los Angeles and Orange counties stood at 16 percent, the sixth-highest level among the nation&rsquo;s 52 largest metropolitan areas. Thirteen years later, that proportion had dropped to 12.8 percent, 33rd among the 52 largest metropolitan areas. In terms of a dropping share of youngsters, the area experienced a 20 percent reduction, the largest in the nation.</p>
<p>In contrast, the Inland Empire remains a bastion of familialism, with 15.3 percent of the population aged 5-14, among the highest levels in the nation. This follows a general pattern; according to recent analysis of Census data, high-cost areas tend to repel families. Of the nation&rsquo;s most expensive areas, such as the Bay Area, New York and Boston, all tend to have well below national norms in terms of families among their populations.</p>
<p>Perhaps more surprising, younger educated workers also are heading to the region. In fact, from 2011-13, according to American Community Survey data, Riverside-San Bernardino witnessed the 12th-largest increase among the 52 major metro areas in the share of college-educated residents ages 25-34. No major California metro area, including Silicon Valley, could match it. From 2000-13, the Inland region experienced a 91 percent jump in population with bachelor or higher degrees, just less than twice the increase for either Orange or Los Angeles counties.</p>
<p>Overall, the I.E. has become something of a growth area for millennials – basically, adults ages 20-29. San Bernardino-Riverside ranked second among 52 metro areas, adding 50,000 millennials, an 8.3 percent increase since 2010. Los Angeles and Orange counties – older, settled areas with far lower population growth – together registered 18th.</p>
<p><strong>Economic Restructuring</strong></p>
<p>These trends also may reflect improving prospects for the region&rsquo;s economic recovery. The area remains some 30,000 jobs below its 2007 level, notes California Lutheran University economist Dan Hamilton, but is now growing faster than the rest of the Southland. The region created jobs over the past year at a 2.2 percent rate, well above the 2.0 percent increase in Orange County and almost twice that of L.A.&rsquo;s 1.3 percent. Foreclosures have diminished to the lowest levels since 2007 and appear back to something resembling normalcy.</p>
<p>One important source of new employment is grass-roots entrepreneurship. Overall, the Inland Empire accounted for a large proportion of the new businesses created statewide from 2012-13 – despite hosting only 7.4 percent of the total businesses in California. A recent report by Beacon Economics suggested that growth will accelerate over the next five years.</p>
<p>At the same time, some of the core industries – such as manufacturing and warehousing – have shown signs of recovery. Industrial vacancy rates have fallen from nearly 12 percent in 2009 to roughly half that level today.</p>
<p>Much of the growth has been for &ldquo;middle-skilled jobs,&rdquo; paying $14 to $21 per hour, including positions in medical services, trucking and customer service. Overall, according to one recent survey, the Inland Empire ranked 13th among the nation&rsquo;s large metropolitan areas in creating such positions. These jobs, notes economist John Husing, are critical to a region where almost half the workforce has a high school education or less.</p>
<p>Even the housing sector, the driver of the post-crash employment decline, has improved considerably. Today, the Inland Empire is experiencing a far greater increase in construction permits than either Los Angeles or Orange counties. This has also helped boost construction employment, although not to anything like the levels experienced a decade before. Construction employment, although up recently, still totals barely half the people it did in 2006.</p>
<p>Some, such as University of Redlands economist Johannes Moenius, express concern that important industries, like warehousing and manufacturing, are increasingly using part-time workers. Positions paying $15,000 to $30,000 annually constitute nearly half of all new jobs.</p>
<p>The ambiguity in the recovery is reflected in a recent survey by Cal State San Bernardino, which found the percentage of those saying the economy was excellent or good had almost doubled since 2010, from 9 percent to 17 percent, but this was considerably below the 40-plus percent seen before the crash.</p>
<p><strong>The Path Ahead</strong></p>
<p>The fate of the Inland Empire remains in the balance. The recovery of the region depends largely on continued widespread population growth, largely stimulated by the production of affordable housing. Yet, at the same time, state regulations, spurred on by the environmental lobby, which seeks to slow, or even eliminate, single-family construction, threaten to force up prices and drive young families outside the state.</p>
<p>Many other core industries of the area – such as warehousing and manufacturing – also face growing regulatory barriers. High taxes and energy costs originating from Sacramento are particularly difficult for industries that require power to operate. Southern California Edison&rsquo;s rates, for example, are almost twice those found in Salt Lake City, Seattle or Albuquerque.</p>
<p>Some may celebrate these policies that encourage people to say &ldquo;good riddance&rdquo; to a region too sprawling and insufficiently cultured. Yet, it&rsquo;s hard to see how Southern California can continue to add workers – notably, younger middle-class families – without a vibrant Inland Empire. It remains the one Southern California region with the land, and the housing cost structure, to accommodate much of the hard-pressed middle class. Without growth inland, Southern California will be largely relegated to a torpid economy and rapidly aging demographics, a fate that would compromise the aspirations of future generations.</p>
<p><em>This piece originally appeared in The Orange County Register.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and&nbsp;Roger Hobbs Distinguished Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. He is also executive director of the Houston-based <a href="http://www.opportunityurbanism.org">Center for Opportunity Urbanism.</a> His newest book,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkId=CAGQAHAYTUPQIPY2">The New Class Conflict</a>&nbsp;is now available at&nbsp;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#%21/%7E/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is also author of&nbsp;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>.&nbsp; He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004845-go-east-young-southern-california-workers#commentsUrban IssuesCaliforniaDemographicsEconomicsHousingLos AngelesPlanningSmall CitiesSuburbsInland EmpirePolicyMon, 09 Feb 2015 09:15:22 -0500Joel Kotkin4845 at http://www.newgeography.comSouthern California Stuck in Drivehttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004785-southern-california-stuck-drive
<p>Southern California has long been a nurturer of dreams that, while widely anticipated, often are never quite achieved. One particularly strong fantasy involves Los Angeles abandoning what one enthusiast calls its &ldquo;car habit&rdquo; and converting into an ever-denser, transit-oriented region.</p>
<p>An analysis of transit ridership, however, shows that the region is essentially no better off than when the the modern period of transit funding began in 1980, with the passage of Proposition A, which authorized a half-cent sales tax for transit. In 1980, approximately 5.9 percent of workers in the metropolitan area (Los Angeles and Orange counties) used transit for their commute. The latest data, for 2013, indicates the ridership figure has fallen to 5.8 percent.</p>
<p>Never ones to let facts get in the way of fantasy, some retrourbanists and media types continue to insist our mass-transit transition is well on its way. Liberal blogger Matt Yglesias, writing in Slate, declared that Los Angeles is destined to become America&rsquo;s &ldquo;next great transit city.&rdquo;</p>
<p>This view is echoed throughout retrourbanist circles. &ldquo;The City of Angels is noticeably transforming. Our once car-centric town is becoming less car-dependent,&rdquo; suggests the local LA Streetsblog, &ldquo;Public transit is having a comeback. Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructures are improving.&rdquo;</p>
<p>Instead of rushing to rail, Angelenos continue to rely on their cars to get to work. From 1980-2013, the market share of drive-alone commuters has risen from 70 percent to 74.1 percent. There has been an increase in driving alone of approximately 1.4 million daily commuters. Driving alone accounted for d approximately 85 percent of the region&rsquo;s increase in commuters.</p>
<p>Why do people stick to their cars? For one thing, transit takes longer. The average drive-alone, one-way commute in Los Angeles was 27.0 minutes in 2013, compared with an average commute of 48.7 minutes for transit.</p>
<p>The other big factor is accessibility to jobs. The University of Minnesota Accessibility Observatory produced an estimate for the percentage of jobs that the average L.A. resident could reach within 30 minutes by car. In Los Angeles, the average resident can reach 60 times as many jobs in that time by car as by transit.</p>
<p><strong>Transit needs downtowns</strong></p>
<p>Transit plays an important role in America, but mostly in the urban cores of a handful of &ldquo;legacy&rdquo; cities. These core metros (excluding their often-sprawling, low-density suburbs) – New York City, Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington and San Francisco – account for 55 percent of all transit-work trip destinations, just 6 percent of the country&rsquo;s employment. Overall, the legacy cities&rsquo; transit ridership is nearly 10 times their proportionate combined share of jobs.</p>
<p>To a large extent, this reflects history and urban form. Transit remains largely a matter of downtowns. The cities with transit legacies have an average of 15 percent of their jobs downtown, three times the average for other major metropolitan areas. In contrast, Downtown Los Angeles has 2 percent of the metropolitan area&rsquo;s jobs. In Orange County, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, homes to much of the regional population, there are really no substantial downtown areas.</p>
<p>In contrast, the many regions sharing L.A.&rsquo;s multipolar form and large-scale transit investments – Atlanta, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Minneapolis-St. Paul and Portland, Ore., – have seen their transit market shares stagnate or decline, despite having built expensive rail systems.</p>
<p>One problem is, like virtually all U.S. metropolitan areas (including the suburbs of legacy cities), the Los Angeles area, which pioneered the multi-polar metropolis, has been becoming more so and is even moving beyond polycentricity. The vast majority of growth in the statistical area encompassing Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties has taken place in precisely those areas – the Inland Empire, South Orange County or the Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys in northern Los Angeles County – that also have the lowest transit ridership. In contrast, the core&rsquo;s growth barely represents a blip. From 2000-10, the functional urban core, which has the strongest concentration of transit destinations, accounted for virtually none of the region's growth.</p>
<p><strong>Dreaming of New York?</strong></p>
<p>For many L.A. planners and urban boosters, more transit – funded from Washington – often seems to constitute an exercise of social engineering on a grand scale. The hope is that, by pushing transit, particularly rail, we will recreate the metropolis with ever-greater density. &ldquo;We are going to remake what the city looks like,&rdquo; then-Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa told an approving New York Times two years ago.</p>
<p>Despite the hoopla and the subsidization of downtown Los Angeles, however, relatively few people work in, or even visit Downtown, ecept for sporting or cultural events, although many pass by it on the freeways.</p>
<p>For most Angelenos, Downtown is simply not part of their day-to-day experience the way, for example, Manhattan is for many New Yorkers, or the Loop is for many residents of the Chicago region.</p>
<p><strong>Transit Class Warfare</strong></p>
<p>Developers and their planning allies tend to focus on transit as something that will get middle-class Angelenos out of their cars. But it&rsquo;s difficult to see this working as long as such an overwhelming majority of jobs (98 percent) are located outside Downtown. Since 1980, driving alone, which was increasing its market share, added 15 times as many new commuters as transit, with its slipping market share.</p>
<p>At the same time, there seems to be a profound unawareness of the low incomes of Los Angeles transit commuters. The latest American Community Survey data (2013) indicates that the median earnings of transit commuters at the national level is more than <em>85 percent higher</em> than in Los Angeles. In the metropolitan areas around transit legacy cities, the median incomes of transit commuters is <em>150 percent higher </em>than in Los Angeles.</p>
<p>To some extent, poorer Angelenos, in the government&rsquo;s expensive shift from buses to trains, are being sacrificed to satisfy the Utopian vision of planners, pad the profits of big urban developers, and to build the campaign war chests of the political class. Indeed, from 2008-12, the bus lines, which carry more than three times as many passengers as trains, were cut 16 percent If L.A. is experiencing a transit revolution, its most dependent riders have been largely left behind.</p>
<p><strong>So What Should Greater LA do?</strong></p>
<p>As anyone who drives the freeways knows well, L.A. has a traffic problem. But Los Angeles also has the shortest average commute time of any high-income world megacity for which data is available, despite having the highest automobile usage, the least transit and, except for New York, the lowest urban density.</p>
<p>The real question is, will more transit, at least in its current form, offer the solution? Certainly, expanding and improving roads – although politically incorrect – has helped make commuting easier for many working in Orange County. Other ways to entice people off the roads, such as telecommuting, should be encouraged. Since 1980, the number of Los Angeles residents working at home has increased by approximately 240,000. This increase – 2.5 times that of transit in total numbers – has come at virtually no cost to taxpayers.</p>
<p>To be sure, many Angelenos, for one reason or another, need decent transit services. Our approach would be for government to find out who these people are, and look for ways to make transit work better for them. Rather than invest huge dollars in rail megaprojects, perhaps we could reduce bus fares, a strategy attributed to the legendary Los Angeles County Supervisor Kenneth Hahn that increased bus ridership dramatically from 1982-85.</p>
<p>Unlike today&rsquo;s &ldquo;progressives,&rdquo; Hahn&rsquo;s prime interest was serving his largely working-class and poor constituents. Besides cutting bus fares and increasingly service, other solutions, such as more competitively contracted service provided by regional agencies, such as Foothill Transit and the Antelope Valley Transit Authority, could provide less-expensive, more efficient and expanded service.</p>
<p>Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, has also expressed interest in promoting the use of rideshare services, like Uber or Lyft, and, more importantly, self-driving cars.</p>
<p>Ultimately, rather than try to recreate New York, or undertake the expensive and virtually impossible task of rebuilding Los Angeles in the image of the latest urban planning fad, we should explore a host of innovative solutions that will help transit riders here and now by developing workable, and effective, ways to help them get to the services and jobs they need.</p>
<p><em>This piece first appeared at the Orange County Register.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Roger Hobbs Distinguished Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. His newest book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkId=CAGQAHAYTUPQIPY2">The New Class Conflict</a> is now available at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a> and <a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#!/~/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
<p><em>Wendell Cox is principal of Demographia, an international public policy and demographics firm. He is co-author of the "</em><a href="http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf"><em>Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey</em></a><em>" and author of "</em><a href="http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf"><em>Demographia World Urban Areas</em></a><em>" and "</em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0595399487?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0595399487"><em>War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life</em></a><em>." He was appointed to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, where he served with the leading city and county leadership as the only non-elected member. He was appointed to the Amtrak Reform Council to fill the unexpired term of Governor Christine Todd Whitman and has served as a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, a national university in Paris.</em></p>
<p><em>Photo: Downtown Los Angeles toward the Hollywood Hills and the San Fernando Valley (by Wendell Cox</em>)</p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004785-southern-california-stuck-drive#commentsUrban IssuesLos AngelesTransportationPolicyMon, 01 Dec 2014 00:38:59 -0500Joel Kotkin and Wendell Cox4785 at http://www.newgeography.comCalifornia's Southern Discomforthttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004766-californias-southern-discomfort
<p>We know this was a harsh recession, followed by, at best, a tepid recovery for the vast majority of Americans. But some people and some regions have surged somewhat ahead, while others have stagnated or worse.</p>
<p>Greater Los Angeles fails to make the grade. In per capita growth of gross domestic product since 2010, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/004529-metro-area-gross-domestic-product" title="according to analyst Aaron Renn">according to analyst Aaron Renn</a>, our region ranks a very mediocre 38th out of 52 metro areas, with a measly 1.5 percent, well below the national average of 3.8 percent. It places behind up-and-comers among the Texas cities, Oklahoma City and some tech-oriented clusters – Silicon Valley ranked second, after Houston. These places have growth rates roughly twice those of the Southland.</p>
<p>When we wanted to drill down to the more local level, and analyze what is happening by county, we needed to go to the Census Bureau, as opposed to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, where we could glean what is happening in our communities. Our analysis is based on those figures, and neither of us hopes the Southern California region continues to stagnate or decline.</p>
<p><strong>Poverty</strong></p>
<p>One of the saddest results of the Great Recession and the weak recovery has been the expansion of poverty across the country. The poverty rate among the country&rsquo;s 52 largest metropolitan areas, according to the most recent census numbers, grew from 14.9 percent in 1999 to 15.8 percent in 2013, a 7 percent rise. At least one-quarter of that rise has taken place since the recovery began.</p>
<p>Southland politicians, like those in much of California, often decry income inequality and poverty, but they have not been very effective in combatting it. The region has had higher-than-average poverty for well over a decade, and things have not gotten better recently. Since 2009, the Los Angeles region, which includes Orange County, has seen its poverty rate grow by 1.8 percent, 80 percent higher than the national norm. The area ranked 47th out of 52 in terms of increased poverty. Riverside-San Bernardino saw a similar jump, 1.7 percent, in poverty.</p>
<p>The scale of the poverty problem in the Southland is much greater than many imagine. When we broke down the figures, Los Angeles County remained the area with the highest concentration of poverty. L.A. saw a slight reduction in poverty from 1999-2010, but has moved in the other direction more recently. From 2010-13, poverty in L.A. County rose from 17.5 percent to 18.9 percent, an 8 percent increase. Poverty now afflicts a considerably larger portion of the population of Los Angeles than it did in 1999.</p>
<p>But if Los Angeles County endures the largest pocket of poverty, there&rsquo;s not much for the surrounding counties to shout about. San Bernardino and Riverside counties have each seen rapid 20 percent increases in their poverty rates since 1999; in fact, San Bernardino&rsquo;s 19.1 percent poverty rate is slightly higher than that of Los Angeles County.</p>
<p>Orange County fares better, but the curse of poverty is spreading even here. Although its 13.5 percent poverty rate lies below the national average, the ranks of the O.C. poor have jumped 30 percent relative to the entire population since 1999. The expansion of poverty as a share of the population has grown by more than 10 percent since 2010.</p>
<p><strong>Low Income Growth and High Housing Prices: A Bad Combination</strong></p>
<p>As befits a region with relatively low GDP growth, incomes in Southern California have stagnated. Median household incomes have dropped in every county in the region, including Ventura and Orange, whose residents boast median household incomes above $70,000, well above the $50,000 range found in Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside. Since 2010, the biggest income drops have happened in the Inland Empire, where real incomes have fallen by nearly 7 percent. Los Angeles also has experienced a drop, with real incomes down 3 percent since 2010.</p>
<p>For the most part, the more-affluent suburban counties have done better, consistent with the two-speed U.S. economy. Orange and Ventura enjoy median household incomes a full $20,000 above those of Los Angeles County and the Inland Empire. This is after the smaller 2.1 percent reduction (2010-13) in Orange County real incomes. Real incomes have recovered, albeit slightly, only in Ventura. The biggest hit has been concentrated in those parts of Southern California – Los Angeles County and the Inland Empire – historically most dependent on blue-collar professions in manufacturing, logistics and construction. These are, for the most part, also the most heavily Latino and African American areas of the region.</p>
<p>So, why can&rsquo;t the Southland replicate the economic boom in the San Francisco Bay Area? Simply put, the Los Angeles region is not the Bay Area, or Seattle. The share of Los Angeles&rsquo; jobs that are tied to manufacturing and logistics is <em>twice</em> that of the San Francisco area. Our population is far less well-educated, particularly in the Inland Empire and much of Los Angeles County, and is also far more heavily African American and <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/21/news/economy/wealth-gap-race/index.htm" title="Latino">Latino</a>, <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-10-07/news/ct-met-black-middle-class-austerity-20121007_1_black-middle-class-black-households-national-rate" title="groups that have fared particularly poorly">groups that have fared particularly poorly</a>. Nationwide, Latino poverty rates, notes a recent <a href="http://www.pewhispanic.org/2011/11/08/hispanic-poverty-rate-highest-in-new-supplemental-census-measure/" title="Pew study">Pew study</a>, stand at 28 percent, the highest for any ethnic group.</p>
<p>Alongside the stagnant economy, growing Latino poverty – which is really the key challenge for Southern California – also reflects a high cost of living. This is most profound in terms of housing costs. Overall, the Southland counties – most notably Los Angeles and Orange – suffer among the highest housing cost burdens, relative to income, than virtually anywhere in the country.</p>
<p>This can be seen by looking at what parts of the country have the highest percentages of people paying more than 50 percent of pretax income for housing. According to the Center for Housing Policy and National Housing Conference, <a href="http://www.nhc.org/media/files/Landscape2013.pdf" title="39 percent">39 percent</a> of working households in the Los Angeles metropolitan area spend more than half their incomes on housing, a somewhat higher rate than in the pricier San Francisco and New York areas and much higher than the national rate of 24 percent of households spending more than half of income on housing, itself far from tolerable.</p>
<p><strong>New Policy Imperatives</strong></p>
<p>Our current mix of state and local policies are neither reviving the regional economy nor reducing poverty. One key reason is that the current political environment – fostered and perpetuated by greens, urban land interests and organized public workers – places little priority on promoting the growth of the tangible economy that tends to employ blue-collar workers. High energy costs, largely due to the state&rsquo;s Draconian commitment to renewable fuels, are a direct threat to any kind of industrial growth, while highly restrictive housing policies slow any hope of meeting the needs of renters and prospective homeowners.</p>
<p>Of course, one could point out that the Bay Area, the one large region in California experiencing above-average income growth, labors under the same progressive policy regime. But the Bay Area, particularly San Francisco, is already largely deindustrialized and its population far more attractive to digitally based companies. It boasts a far larger pool of venture capital, and a unique network to support tech.</p>
<p>A Google or an Apple can easily move its energy-hungry arrays of computer servers to less-expensive states, along with its device manufacturing. The more grass-roots based, small-business-oriented Southland economy is far less able to adapt to regulatory strictures from Sacramento.</p>
<p>Southern California leaders clearly need to understand that the region is not winning under the current policy environment in the state. Steps to re-energize our basic industries and restart new housing, particularly single-family housing desired by most young families, need to be taken. Other steps, from reforming the schools and rebuilding basic infrastructure to modernizing higher education, also are imperative. At risk is not just a comfortable way of life, but also the legacy of opportunity that has been so critical to this region from its earliest days, a legacy now at extreme risk.</p>
<p><em>This piece first appeared at the Orange County Register.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Roger Hobbs Distinguished Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. His newest book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkId=CAGQAHAYTUPQIPY2">The New Class Conflict</a> is now available at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a> and <a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#!/~/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
<p><em>Wendell Cox is principal of Demographia, an international public policy and demographics firm. He is co-author of the "</em><a href="http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf"><em>Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey</em></a><em>" and author of "</em><a href="http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf"><em>Demographia World Urban Areas</em></a><em>" and "</em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0595399487?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0595399487"><em>War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life</em></a><em>." He was appointed to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, where he served with the leading city and county leadership as the only non-elected member. He was appointed to the Amtrak Reform Council to fill the unexpired term of Governor Christine Todd Whitman and has served as a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, a national university in Paris.</em></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004766-californias-southern-discomfort#commentsUrban IssuesMiddle ClassCaliforniaHousingLos AngelesSuburbsInland EmpirePolicyMon, 10 Nov 2014 00:38:02 -0500Joel Kotkin and Wendell Cox4766 at http://www.newgeography.comLos Angeles: Rail for Othershttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004761-los-angeles-rail-others
<p>A few years ago, the satirical publication, <em>The Onion</em> ran an article under the headline &quot;<a href="http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-98-percent-of-us-commuters-favor-public-tra,1434/">98 Percent of US Commuters Favor Public Transit for Others</a>.&quot; The spoof cited a mythical press release by the American Public Transit Association (APTA), in which Lance Holland of Anaheim, California said &quot;Expanding mass transit isn't just a good idea, it's a necessity,&quot; Holland said. &quot;My drive to work is unbelievable. I spend more than two hours stuck in 12 lanes of traffic. It's about time somebody did something to get some of these other cars off the road.&quot; <em>The Onion</em> spoof said that APTA would be kicking off a new promotional campaign using the slogan &quot;Take the Bus... I'll be Glad You Did.&quot; <em>The Onion </em>spoof singled out Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) officials as saying that public support for mass transit will lead to its expansion and improvement.&quot;</p>
<p>&quot;Transit for Others&quot; characterizes three decades of transit in Los Angeles County. Despite its massive $10 billion plus rail program, MTA bus and rail services carried fewer riders in 2012 (latest Federal Transit Administration data) than were carried by the buses in 1985 (MTA was formed in the early 1990s from a merger between the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Rapid Transit District). </p>
<p><strong>The Birth of Modern Rail</strong></p>
<p>The history of the modern Los Angeles rail revival began with a special meeting of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission on August 20, 1980. I was to play a principal role.</p>
<p>I had the honor of being appointed to LACTC by Mayor Tom Bradley to three terms and was the only principal commissioner who was not an elected official. The other members, under state law, were the Mayor of Los Angeles, a Los Angeles City Council Member, the Mayor of Long Beach, two city council members from other cities, the five county supervisors and an additional member appointed by the Mayor of Los Angeles (which was me). </p>
<p>The special meeting had been requested by legendary county Supervisor Kenneth Hahn, who proposed a 5-year reduction of the bus fare to $0.50 to be financed by a sales tax increase, which would be submitted to the voters at the November election. Any money not needed for the bus fare reduction would be used for unspecified transit purposes. </p>
<p>The original motion by Supervisor Hahn was amended by Gardena Mayor Edmund Russ, who proposed a &quot;local return program,&quot; which would dedicate 25 percent of the funding to municipalities (and Los Angeles County for unincorporated areas) on a population basis, to be used for transit services. At that time, local operators provided less than 20% of the bus service, with the overwhelming majority of services provided by the Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD). </p>
<p>I was concerned that the proposal by Supervisor Hahn failed to provide funding for a rail system. I believed at the time that a rail system would reduce the intractable traffic congestion in Los Angeles. I was also concerned at the rapidly rising unit costs of bus operations and was convinced that unless there was a &quot;firewall,&quot; no money would be available for rail.</p>
<p>As a result, on the spur of the moment, I introduced an amendment to direct 35 percent of the proceeds to rail. This motion was seconded by Supervisor Baxter Ward and was incorporated into the final package Supervisor Hahn accepted a shortening of the reduced fare period to three years. The measure, Proposition A was placed on the ballot and was passed by the voters in November.</p>
<p><strong>Transit Since Proposition A</strong></p>
<p>The impacts of the three programs approved in 1980 had varying results on transit in Los Angeles.</p>
<p><strong>Three Year Fare Reduction (1982-1985): </strong>Between 1982 and 1985, there was a flat $0.50 fare for transit services in the county. SCRTD experienced an increase from 354 million to 497 million annual passengers. At 40%, this may be the largest three year relative increase in any large transit agency's ridership in decades. Ridership fell after subsequent fare increases. </p>
<p>Further, the fare reduction was cost effective. The cost per new rider was less than $1.00 (2012$), a small fraction of typical projected costs per new riders on proposed rail transit systems around the country. By comparison, the cost per new rider on the east extension of the Gold light rail line was <a href="http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/LA_Metro1AA.doc">projected at more than $30</a> (2012$, $24.19 in 2003). This is more than 30 times the cost per new rider of the low fare program.</p>
<p>The strong ridership increase in response to the low fare program is consistent with the relatively low incomes of Los Angeles transit commuters. In 2013, the median income of Los Angeles County transit commuters was approximately one-half that of the national, 60 percent below that of the six metropolitan areas with <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003507-transit-legacy-cities">transit legacy cities</a> (New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Boston and Washington) and even lower than the other 45 metropolitan areas over 1,000,000 population (Figure 1)</p>
<p><img src="http://www.newgeography.com/files/cox-latrans-1.png"></p>
<p><strong>Local Return Program: </strong>Since 1985, when the bus fare reduction program ended, by far the greatest impact on ridership was from the Local Return program. In 1985, the existing local bus operators carried approximately 55 million annual passengers, a figure that rose to more than 130 million in 2012 (a nearly 140 percent increase). This ridership increase is more passengers that were carried on all the bus and rail systems of Dallas (DART), Salt Lake City and St. Louis in 2012, according to Federal Transit Administration data.</p>
<p><strong>Urban Rail Program: </strong>Many miles of urban rail have been built in Los Angeles County, including two subways and five light rail lines (determined by route termini from downtown). But the hope that others would leave their cars for transit, as expressed in <em>The Onion</em> has not occurred. By 2012, Federal Transit Administration data indicates that MTA (formed by a merger of LACTC and the Southern California Rapid Transit District, which operated the system before) bus and rail system was carrying 475 million annual riders, down from the 497 million carried on buses alone in 1985.</p>
<p>This is despite constructing billions in subway lines, light rail lines, and rapid busways and the addition of approximately 2 million residents to Los Angeles County. </p>
<p><strong>The &quot;Return&quot; on Local Return: </strong>The big surprise was the &quot;return&quot; on the local return program. A number of new systems were established, such as Foothill Transit and the Antelope Valley Transportation Authority. Many cities established new bus and paratransit systems. The city of Los Angeles now operates a number of commuter express bus services and local circulation bus services throughout the city. Many of the new systems used competitive tendering, under which services are awarded to competing private companies, with fares, routes, and schedules dictated by the public agencies. One important advantage of competitive tendering is lower costs, which makes it possible to provide more service. This service approach has been used extensively in Denver and San Diego. Further, virtually all of London's largest public bus system in the high income world is competitively tendered as are all of the bus, subway, commuter rail and light rail services in Stockholm.</p>
<p>Overall, the Los Angeles County transit system, including MTA and the local operators experienced a ridership increase of 55 million between 1985 and 2012 (This excludes Metrolink, the five county commuter rail system established in the 1990s). Virtually all of the ridership increase is attributable to the local bus services operated by cities and by new sub-regional agencies (Figure 2). </p>
<p><img src="http://www.newgeography.com/files/cox-latrans-2.png"></p>
<p><strong>Overall Transit Work Trip Share</strong></p>
<p>Census Bureau data indicates that the employment access share of transit in Los Angeles County has declined modestly, from 7.0 percent in 1980 to 6.9 percent in 2013 (including Metrolink). Driving alone increased from 68.7 percent to 72.7 percent, while car pool commuting dropped from 16.8 percent to 10.0 percent. Outside of driving alone, the largest increase occurred in working at home rising from 1.5 percent to 5.2 percent (Figure 3). Unlike transit, working at home requires virtually no expenditures of public funds. Transit one-way work trips increased 77,000 daily, while driving along increased 947,000 and working at home increased 182,000. Car pools suffered a large loss (Figure 4). </p>
<p>Thus, <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/transit-639699-angeles-percent.html">despite rave reviews about its rail system</a>, Los Angeles relies on cars to an even greater extent than before. Los Angeles qualifies as the <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_pivot/2012/09/l_a_metro_how_los_angeles_is_becoming_america_s_next_great_mass_transit_city_.html">next great transit city</a> only if the standard is spending and construction, rather than ridership.</p>
<p><img src="http://www.newgeography.com/files/cox-latrans-3.png"></p>
<p><img src="http://www.newgeography.com/files/cox-latrans-4.png"></p>
<p><em>Wendell Cox is principal of Demographia, an international public policy and demographics firm. He is co-author of the &quot;</em><a href="http://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf"><em>Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey</em></a><em>&quot; and author of &quot;</em><a href="http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf"><em>Demographia World Urban Areas</em></a><em>&quot; and &quot;</em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0595399487?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0595399487"><em>War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life</em></a><em>.&quot; He was appointed to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, where he served with the leading city and county leadership as the only non-elected member. He was appointed to the Amtrak Reform Council to fill the unexpired term of Governor Christine Todd Whitman and has served as a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, a national university in Paris.</em></p>
<p>----</p>
<p>Note: Part of the MTA/SCRTD ridership loss was due to the transfer of services to Foothill Transit and the city of Los Angeles in the late 1980s.</p>
<p>Photo: Los Angeles County Transportation Commission logo from 1980s</p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004761-los-angeles-rail-others#commentsUrban IssuesLos AngelesSuburbsTransportationWed, 05 Nov 2014 00:38:32 -0500Wendell Cox4761 at http://www.newgeography.comBattle of the Upstarts: Houston vs. San Francisco Bayhttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004551-battle-upstarts-houston-vs-san-francisco-bay
<p>&ldquo;Human happiness,&rdquo; the Greek historian Herodotus once observed, &ldquo;does not abide long in one place.&rdquo; In its 240 years or so of existence, the United States has experienced similar ebbs and flows, with Boston replaced as the nation&rsquo;s commercial capital first by Philadelphia and then by New York. The 19th century saw the rise of frontier settlements—Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and finally Chicago—that also sought out the post position. In the mid 20th century, formerly obscure Los Angeles emerged as New York&rsquo;s most potent rival.</p>
<p>Today we are seeing yet another shuffling of the deck among American regions. New York remains the country&rsquo;s preeminent city, but its most powerful rivals are likely to be neither Chicago nor Los Angeles, but rather two regions rarely listed in the hierarchy of influential regions: the San Francisco Bay Area and Houston.</p>
<p><strong><em>Making of a new pecking order</em></strong></p>
<p>The Bay Area does not rank among the 20 top global cities in most studies, such as the 2014 <a href="http://www.atkearney.com/research-studies/global-cities-index/full-report" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">A.T. Kearney</a> listings. In the respected rankings of the London-based <a href="http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2010t.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Globalization and World Cities Network</a>, the Bay Area stood below not only Chicago, which is considered an &ldquo;alpha&rdquo; global city, but also such places as Toronto and Mexico City.</p>
<p>Yet such rankings vastly underestimate the power now being wielded by the San Francisco region. As the headquarters for the largest concentration of cutting edge tech firms in the world, the Bay Area increasingly shapes the operations of companies from manufacturing and marketing to retail and media. And given that roughly half the nation&rsquo;s <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Silicon-Valley-S-F-dominate-venture-capital-5631809.php" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">venture capital</a> is still being <a href="http://www.wired.com/2014/09/money-pouring-tech-like-1999and-thats-good/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">lavished</a> on area start-ups, it is not surprising that Silicon Valley ranks number one in the world as a place to launch tech ventures, according to the <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/20/startup-genome-ranks-the-worlds-top-startup-ecosystems-silicon-valley-tel-aviv-l-a-lead-the-way/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Startup Genome</a>.</p>
<p>Tech dominance, according to a <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/004475-the-worlds-most-influential-cities" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">recent study</a> on global cities conducted by my firm NewGeography, explains why the San Francisco Bay Area nudges out much larger Los Angeles for bragging rights on America&rsquo;s Pacific Rim. Technology leaders, including Intel, Apple, Oracle, Google, and Facebook, are based in Silicon Valley, while Asian global tech firms such as Samsung also have North American headquarters there. Top technology firms from other cities often have their key R&amp;D functions in the Bay Area. Even a frugal firm like <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/20/technology/to-catch-up-walmart-moves-to-amazon-turf.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Wal-Mart</a> is enlarging its Silicon Valley presence.</p>
<p>The current social media bubble will surely pop, but as Michael S. Malone and others have <a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/michael-malone-why-silicon-valley-will-continue-to-rule-the-tech-economy-1408747795" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">noted</a>, the Bay Area&rsquo;s preeminence will likely continue, fueled by its unique concentration of engineers, entrepreneurs, and risk capital. As a lure for the ambitious, Silicon Valley and <a href="http://www.modernluxury.com/san-francisco/story/go-west-young-bank-bro" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">San Francisco</a> are replacing Wall Street. Google alone has 1,200 employees who formerly worked for large U.S. investment banks, and migration from the Big Apple to California is now at its highest level since 2006.</p>
<p>Much of the appeal of the Bay Area is a result of happy coincidence of history and geography. The Bay Area—where I went to school and got my start in journalism, and where parts of my family have resided since the &rsquo;50s—has been blessed with excellent higher education and is centered around what is arguably America&rsquo;s most beautiful city. Good weather, beautiful vistas, and access to nature have made the Bay Area a natural lure for people who can afford to live wherever they want.</p>
<p><strong><em>The Energy Capital</em></strong></p>
<p>Houston, where I have been working as a consultant, hardly qualifies as one of the most physically attractive or temperate cities. San Francisco may well have been, as Neil Morgan suggested a half century ago, &ldquo;the Narcissus of the West,&rdquo; but Houston, in most accounts, has been widely disparaged as hot, steamy, ugly and featureless. Yet despite this, its ascendency is no less compelling than that of the Bay Area.</p>
<p>Houston&rsquo;s trump card, like the Bay Area&rsquo;s, resides in its control of one strategic industry, in this case energy. The majority of traded foreign oil majors, such as London-based Shell and British Petroleum, have their U.S. headquarters in Houston, and even companies based elsewhere boast a significant Houston presence. For example, Exxon, although it has its headquarters in Dallas-Fort Worth, is opening a massive Houston campus that will be home to 10,000 employees. Additionally, a majority of the world&rsquo;s largest oil services companies, such as Baker Hughes, Schlumberger, and FMC Technologies, are based in Houston.</p>
<p>Altogether, more than 5,000 <a href="http://www.houstontx.gov/abouthouston/houstonfacts.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">energy-related companies</a> call Houston home. The city employs three times more people in energy than its second place rival, Dallas-Ft. Worth, and more than the next five cities combined. This growth is likely to accelerate because foreign companies, notably from Germany, have begun buying up energy firms in the area, including Siemens&rsquo;s recent $7.6 billion dollar purchase of the <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/blog/drilling-down/2014/09/siemens-to-buy-major-houston-energy-company.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Dresser Rand Group</a>, an energy equipment firm.</p>
<p> Houston has added more than 10 percent more jobs since 2008, almost twice the increase in the Bay Area. Since 2000 Houston&rsquo;s employment figures have shot up 32 percent, while the Bay Area has grown by barely 4 percent. And it&rsquo;s not just energy that&rsquo;s driving things—Houston is now the nation&rsquo;s largest export port and boasts the world&rsquo;s largest medical center. It has also become, by some measurements, the most ethnically diverse (<a href="http://kinder.rice.edu/uploadedFiles/Urban_Research_Center/Media/Houston%20Region%20Grows%20More%20Ethnically%20Diverse%202-13.pdf" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">PDF</a>) region in the country. In the last decade, for example, Houston <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003629-houston-rising-why-next-great-american-cities-aren-t-what-you-think" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">increased</a> its foreign-born population by 400,000, second only to New York and well ahead of much larger Los Angeles.</p>
<p><strong><em>The big losers: LA and Chicago—but also New York</em></strong></p>
<p>In the past century New York and Los Angeles have dominated American media. This is being severely undermined by the Bay Area&rsquo;s digital economy. Since 2001, notes Mark Schill at Praxis Strategy (where I am a senior fellow), book, periodical, and newspaper publishing—all traditionally concentrated in the New York area—have lost some 250,000 jobs, while Internet publishing and portals generated some 70,000 new positions, many of them in the Bay Area or Seattle.</p>
<p>Google and Yahoo are already among the largest media companies in the world. (Yahoo now refers to itself as a digital media company rather than a technology company). With the ubiquity of its iTunes platform, Apple exercises ever greater control over consumer distribution of entertainment products such as music and video; Netflix, Hulu, and YouTube could become the studios of the future. This could shift global media decision-making from its familiar New York-Los Angeles axis to the Bay Area.</p>
<p>This is particularly bad news for Los Angeles, whose grip on the entertainment industry was weakening even before Silicon Valley&rsquo;s rise. Since 2004, LA&rsquo;s<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2014/apr/10/entertainment/la-et-ct-2020-commission-hollywood-20140410" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">entertainment industry</a> lost roughly 11 percent of its jobs, as production shifted to Canada, Louisiana, and other locales.</p>
<p>The decline in media employment comes on the heels of a rapid industrial decline—the area has lost more than 90,000 <a href="http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20130921/aerospace-in-southern-california-still-strong-despite-c-17-and-other-losses" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">aerospace jobs</a> since the end of the Cold War. The situation is so dismal that a report issued by many of the region&rsquo;s top business and political leaders concluded that the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/10/us/report-finds-a-los-angeles-in-decline.html?_r=0" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">city</a> &ldquo;is barely treading water while the rest of the world is moving forward.&rdquo;</p>
<p>Chicago&rsquo;s situation is arguably even worse, but it is more threatened by Houston, which has already <a href="http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/02/world-capitals-cities-century-opinions-columnists-21-century-cities-09-global-capitals.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">passed</a> the Windy City in numbers of corporate headquarters. Since 2010, when U.S. industry began recovering,<u> </u>Houston manufacturing employment expanded by more than 17 percent, compared to flat growth in Chicago.</p>
<p>&ldquo;Houston is the Chicago of this era—like the old Chicago,&rdquo; remarks David Peebles, who runs the Texas office of Odebrecht, a $45 billion engineering firm based in Brazil. &ldquo;In the &rsquo;60s you had to go to Chicago, Cleveland, and Detroit. Now Houston is the place for new industry.&rdquo;</p>
<p>With its industrial base eroding, Chicago is no longer a strategic hub for any key industry. Outside of trading commodities, it also no longer serves as a major global financial center. Regional population growth has been meager over the <a href="http://pointsandfigures.com/2014/05/17/high-unemployment-illinois/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">past decade</a>, and the city&rsquo;s own pension issues may be <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/26/report-chicagos-pension-woes-worse-than-detroits" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">worse than Detroit&rsquo;s</a>.</p>
<p>Chicago retains its brilliant skyline, great cultural institutions, powerful political influence, and a strong business community. But its days of America&rsquo;s number two city are long gone, and, as we enter the mid-2000s, it is <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/004153-moving-south-and-west-metropolitan-america-" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">falling behind</a> not only Los Angeles and New York but the two rising Texas cities, Houston and Dallas, both expected to pass the &ldquo;city of big shoulders&rdquo; in population by mid-century, or earlier.</p>
<p><strong><em>Engineering the Future</em></strong><strong></strong></p>
<p>In the coming decades, New York will remain the nation&rsquo;s top global city, due to its remarkable urban legacy, the power of Wall Street, and the entrenched traditional media. But its Achilles heel is a lack of the engineering power necessary to address key challenges such as the digitization of industry, energy efficiency or climate change. New York is profoundly weak in engineering talent (<a href="http://www.houston.org/newgen/16_Industry_NEC/16T%20percent%2020W002%20percent%2020Highest%20percent%2020Concentration%20percent%2020of%20percent%2020Engineering%20percent%2020Occupations.pdf" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">PDF</a>)—ranking 78th out of 85 metropolitan areas in engineers per capita.</p>
<p>In contrast, the Bay Area represents the epitome of engineering power, with the San Jose area boasting the largest per capita concentration of engineers of any major metropolitan area. The Bay Area&rsquo;s power to develop new technologies and its almost unfathomable wealth will continue to undermine traditional institutions, from Hollywood and Wall Street to business services, tourism, automotive, and even aerospace industries.</p>
<p>Far less appreciated, Houston, rather than being a southern city of duller wits, actually ranks second in engineers per capita. If the Bay Area is master of the digital economy, Houston ranks as the technological leader of the material one; it is the capital for the energy-driven revival of U.S. industry, not only in Texas but throughout the old industrial <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/09/business/an-energy-boom-lifts-the-heartland.html?_r=0" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">heartland</a>. Revealingly, Houston actually has seen far more rapid growth in both college educated and millennial population since 2000 than the Bay Area, as well as New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles.</p>
<p><strong><em>Rival Approaches to Urbanism</em></strong></p>
<p>The Bay Area, for all its vaunted progressivism, increasingly resembles a &ldquo;gated community&rdquo; whose high prices repel most potential newcomers, particularly families. Already by far the nation&rsquo;s least affordable city—only 14 percent of current residents can possibly afford to <a href="http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/10/where-even-middle-class-cant-afford-live-any-more/7194/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">buy a home</a>—it represents a growth model that is by definition exclusive, almost a throwback to medieval forms where the rich clustered inside the city gates.</p>
<p>High housing prices, notes economist <a href="http://247wallst.com/housing/2012/05/18/facebooks-ipo-and-housing-prices-be-careful-what-you-wish-for/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Jed Kolko</a>, account for the fact that, despite the boom, population growth in the Bay Area remains well below national averages. From 2000 to 2013, the region lost approximately 550,000 domestic migrants. Despite sizable immigration, the regional population growth rate has fallen below the national average.</p>
<p>In contrast, Houston is among the fastest growing regions in the country, with rapid increases both in domestic migrants and newcomers from abroad. This stems from both lower housing prices and a growth model that is far more amenable to higher paid blue collar and middle management positions. Since 2000, Houston&rsquo;s population has grown by 30 percent compared, three times that of the Bay Area.</p>
<p>Ironically, Houston&rsquo;s growth has been more egalitarian than that of the notionally super-progressive San Francisco region. A recent Brookings <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/02/cities-unequal-berube" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">report</a> found that income inequality has increased most rapidly in what is probably the most left-leaning big city in America, where the wages of the poorest 20 percent of all households have actually declined amid the dot com billions.</p>
<p>This inequality has a distinct racial element. The Bay Area gap between white residents (who dominate the tech economy) and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/10/silicon-valley-poverty_n_2849285.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">minorities</a> is among the highest in the nation while, during the boom, income has fallen for Hispanics and African-Americans, according to Joint Venture Silicon Valley.</p>
<p>This racial divergence is far less pronounced in Houston, while the growth of poverty since 2000 has been slower, increasing at one third the rate of New York and San Francisco, and half that of Los Angeles. The Texas city may lack the great views of San Francisco, but Houston has turned out to be a better city for middle class minorities. Homeownership among African Americans stands at 42 percent and for Latinos at more than 53 percent; this compares to 32 and 37 percent in the Bay Area.</p>
<p>Perhaps the biggest differences can be seen in families. Of the nation&rsquo;s 52 largest metropolitan areas, the Bay Area has the lowest percentage, 11.5 percent, of people ages 5 to 14. In Houston, 23 percent of the population fits this age category. In particular San Francisco is notoriously inhospitable to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/families-flee-san-francisco_n_1335639.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">families</a>, with the lowest percentage of kids of any major city.</p>
<p>The two regions also reflect very different urban forms. The Bay Area&rsquo;s leadership has opted to favor dense &ldquo;in fill&rdquo; growth and sought to restrict <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/004219-work-access-non-centered-san-francisco-bay-area" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">suburban</a>development. Houston has taken a different tack. As its population has expanded, so too has the metropolitan area. This includes the development of many planned communities that appeal to middle class families and many immigrants. In 2013, Houston alone had more <a href="http://houston.culturemap.com/news/real-estate/04-02-14-boom-on-houston-notches-more-housing-starts-than-the-entire-state-of-california/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">housing starts</a> than the entire state of California.</p>
<p>But it would be wrong to dismiss Houston&rsquo;s model as merely &ldquo;sprawl.&rdquo; Instead it is better seen as simply expansive. In fact, arguably no inner ring in the country has seen more rapid growth, with high-rise, mid-rise and townhouse development in many long neglected districts. The increase in high-density housing tracts (more than 5,000 per square mile) since 2000 has been almost ten times higher than the Bay Area.</p>
<p><strong><em>The Political Battle for the Future</em></strong></p>
<p>Increasingly America&rsquo;s future will be determined by these two cities, with the issue of addressing climate change at the fore. Much of the Bay Area&rsquo;s leadership—led by the likes of Google Chairman <a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/google-alec-lying-about-climate-change" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Eric Schmidt</a> and investor <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-steyer/climate-change-is-on-the-_b_5368917.html" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">Tom Steyer</a>—have all but declared war on the oil and gas industry. Several colleges and universities in the region, including Stanford, have shed their <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_24380957/bay-area-community-college-foundation-says-no-fossil" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">energy holdings</a>, and Silicon Valley has nurtured movements such as Bill McKibben&rsquo;s <a href="http://local.350.org/350-silicon-valley/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">350.org</a> that seek to revoke the &ldquo;social license&rdquo; of big oil, a tactic used previously against the tobacco companies and firms that did business in apartheid South Africa.</p>
<p>The elites of Silicon Valley and San Francisco are not just interested in saving the earth; they wish to profit from a change in the nation&rsquo;s energy economy. Google, Sun Microsystems founder Vinod Khosla, and <a href="http://thefederalist.com/2013/10/02/the-venture-corporatists/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">top venture capitalists</a> such as John Doerr have bolstered their already ultra-thick wallets by capitalizing on &ldquo;green energy&rdquo; <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304561004579137641380093248" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">subsidies</a> and outright grants from various levels of government. Given these investments, it&rsquo;s easier to understand the Valley&rsquo;s support for draconian climate change legislation, complete with attempts to demonize &ldquo;Texas oil.&rdquo; (One won&rsquo;t see such populist zeal on , say, increasing capital gains rates.)</p>
<p>The Valley&rsquo;s hostility to fossil fuel energy, and its jihad to destroy an entire industry, is only barely recognized in Houston. I also have never heard anyone there suggest that Silicon Valley should be closed down as a danger to the planet (or at least a threat to the attention span of younger Americans). Houstonians, particularly in the energy industry, generally lack media savvy, which is one reason why energy is widely rated as the country&rsquo;s <a href="http://247wallst.com/special-report/2012/08/24/americas-most-hated-industries/" target="_blank" sl-processed="1">least popular industry</a>. Also missing, thankfully, is the sense of entitlement and self-congratulation one finds in the Bay Area. But once the intention to devastate the oil and gas industry is better understood, expect the energy capital to square off against the tech center, generating what may be the regional battle royal of our era.</p>
<p><em>This piece originally appeared at The Daily Beast.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Roger Hobbs Distinguished Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. His newest book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkId=CAGQAHAYTUPQIPY2">The New Class Conflict</a> is now available at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a> and <a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#!/~/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
<p><em>Photos courtesy of <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aerial_of_Texas_Medical_Center_with_Downtown_Houston_in_the_background_(cropped).jpg">University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston Office of Communications </a>and <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Market_Street_San_Francisco_From_Twin_Peaks.jpg">Vincent Bloch</a>.</em></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004551-battle-upstarts-houston-vs-san-francisco-bay#commentsUrban IssuesMiddle ClassDemographicsEconomicsHoustonLos AngelesNew YorkSan FranciscoChicagoMon, 06 Oct 2014 01:38:30 -0400Joel Kotkin4551 at http://www.newgeography.comSouthern California Becoming Less Family-Friendlyhttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004520-southern-california-becoming-less-family-friendly
<p>The British Talmudic scholar Abraham Cohen noted that, throughout history, children were thought of as &ldquo;a precious loan from God to be guarded with loving and fateful care.&rdquo; Yet, increasingly and, particularly, here in Southern California, we are rejecting this loan, and abandoning our role as parents.</p>
<p>This, of course, is a process seen around the high-income world, and even in some developing countries. But, here in America, some regions are moving in this post-familial direction faster than others, and, sadly, Southern California, for the most part, is leading the trend.</p>
<p>Historically, Southern California, as a lure first for domestic migrants and, later, for foreign immigrants, has been an incubator of families. As recently as 2000, the proportion of population ages 5-14 in Los Angeles and Orange counties stood at 16 percent, the sixth-highest level among the nation&rsquo;s 52 largest metropolitan areas. Thirteen years later, that proportion had dropped to 12.8 percent, ranking 33rd. The area experienced a 20 percent drop in its share of youngsters, the largest decline among U.S. metro areas.</p>
<p>Of course, not everywhere in Southern California has experienced such a precipitous shift. The Inland Empire, which stands apart in census data, remains a relative bastion of familialism, with 15.3 percent of the population between ages 5-14. Yet even the Inland Empire is slipping somewhat, from having the highest percentage of children to a ranking of fourth, and experiencing a 17 percent decline in children&rsquo;s share of the population, the fourth-largest percentage drop in the nation.</p>
<p>If we try to focus even more closely, the patterns of decline, and the few bright spots, become more clear. Using 2010 U.S. Census data for specific regions (more up-to-date numbers are not yet available at the local level), it&rsquo;s clear where much of this loss is concentrated.</p>
<p>The most precipitous declines have been in the inner city, notably Central Los Angeles, which experienced a net loss of 87,000 youngsters from 2000-10. Although their rate of loss was not as severe as in the core, other, once family-rich parts of the region – the San Fernando and San Gabriel valleys, Santa Ana/Anaheim, Long Beach and Whittier-Southeast Los Angeles County – all posted double-digit percentage drops in children.</p>
<p>Only a few areas of Southern California experienced growth in the number of children. Much of the growth was in the vast, outer suburbs and exurbs – places such as the Victor Valley, San Bernardino, Perris-Temecula, Santa Clarita-Antelope Valley and Riverside-Moreno Valley, as well as decidedly more upscale Irvine-South Orange County.</p>
<p>In a sense, these numbers tell several stories. To be sure, high housing prices seem to have a direct impact on family formation, pushing people further out to the periphery or, in some cases, out of the region entirely. Overall, according to recent analysis of census data, high-cost areas tend to repel families; almost all the most expensive areas in the country, such as the Bay Area, New York and Boston, have all experienced strong drops in numbers of children.</p>
<p>This has resulted, as demographer <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/002566-los-angeles-gets-old" title="Ali Modarres">Ali Modarres</a> has demonstrated, in a gradual emptying out of families from the poor, but still expensive, inner core of Los Angeles. These areas tend to be heavily immigrant, and once were seen as the generators of a new generation of Angelenos. Now, however, as Modarres suggests, these areas are also &ldquo;getting old,&rdquo; with grandparents remaining but the new generation headed to other locales within or beyond the region. This process, he notes, has been accelerated by a decline in immigration to the region, particularly among Latinos, who long settled in these areas.</p>
<p>Housing prices are not the only determinant. Prices are even higher in the Bay Area, which has seen a falling number of children, but not as severe as in Los Angeles.</p>
<p>One likely explanation is the Southland&rsquo;s relatively weak economy, which continues to create jobs sluggishly, and an unemployment rate, particularly in Los Angeles County, well above the state and national averages. High prices repel families, but this is particularly true in a region generating relatively little economic opportunity.</p>
<p>There are other factors, particularly for middle-class families, who tend to have more choice where to locate. One seems to be education. For example, Irvine-South Orange County does well in this regard, but its housing costs are beyond the budgets of most other than upper-middle-income households, which tend to be Asian or non-Hispanic white. Irvine has a national reputation for excellent schools, a major lure to families who wish to avoid the expense of private education.</p>
<p>For some in Southern California, particularly those pushing high-density and rental housing, these shifts may be considered a boon. After all, households with children, even more than most people, tend to prefer single-family homes and tend to embrace the notion of ownership. Single people are more likely to choose – by preference or because of cost – rental properties. The vision of Southern California as primarily dominated by high-density rentals correlates with requirements of state law and plans of the Southern California Association of Governments.</p>
<p>At the same time, the economic languor of this region may make many of these bold designs untenable. People without decent – or any – employment do not make ideal tenants any more than they constitute potential homeowners. Given the high costs of high-density construction, this suggests that many units will be rentable only by aging former homeowners or by several families sharing a unit.</p>
<p>Sadly, the decline in homeownership and the single-family housing market may contribute long term to the region&rsquo;s continued relative economic eclipse. Single-family home construction is among the most reliable contributors to local economic growth and job creation. In contrast, each multifamily unit constructed contributes <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/americas_millenials_in_the_recovery_jf_7.24.14.pdf" title="60 percent less to the GDP">60 percent less to the GDP</a>.</p>
<p>More important still, the loss of families presages a future that we can already see in many European and east Asian countries. There is the development of an aging, inner core, made up largely of retirees, both poor and affluent, sprinkled among areas dominated by young, mostly childless, people. Over time, this leads to a less-dynamic region, as the workforce and consumer base shrinks, and politics shift emphasis from economic growth to redistribution. Meanwhile, many of the poor and working-class families are forced out toward the furthest periphery, often far from employment and relatives.</p>
<p>Can this process be reversed? Certainly a stronger economy, with more middle-wage jobs, might encourage people to have families, and give them the incentive, as well as the wherewithal, to buy a house. It would provide parents, and potential parents, with the notion that they can create a new generation with reasonable economic prospects.</p>
<p>The other key factor is a radical reordering of our education systems. It is clear from the data that areas with good schools, such as Irvine, continue to attract families, even at very high housing price points. If middle-class families feel they can access a decent public education in the older, settled areas, such as the San Fernando Valley, L.A.&rsquo;s Westside or North Orange County, they might be more willing to put down roots in these places, which would help create the greater stability generally associated with families, especially homeowners.</p>
<p>Sadly, political leadership in most of Southern California and Sacramento seems blissfully unaware of these trends, or the potential danger to the area&rsquo;s economic, as well as its demographic, vitality. Perhaps a region dominated by aging populations, and fewer families, by nature tends to look backward and neglect the kind of infrastructure investment, including in education, that families and business require.</p>
<p>A resurgent hipster economy may not require much economic growth, or changes in the political system, but the region&rsquo;s families need a thorough reversal in course if this region hopes to retain its appeal as an incubator of future generations.</p>
<p><em>This piece originally appeared at The Orange County Register.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Distinguished Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. His newest book, The New Class Conflict is now available at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a> and <a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#!/~/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.bigstockphoto.com/image-232533/stock-photo-baby"><em>Baby photo</em></a><em> by Bigstock.</em></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004520-southern-california-becoming-less-family-friendly#commentsUrban IssuesMiddle ClassCaliforniaEconomicsHousingLos AngelesInland EmpirePolicyMon, 15 Sep 2014 01:38:47 -0400Joel Kotkin4520 at http://www.newgeography.comL.A. Hanging on as a Top Global Cityhttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004498-la-hanging-a-top-global-city
<p>For more than a century, Southern Californians have dreamed of their region becoming host to a great global city. At the turn of the 20th century Henry Huntington, who built much of the area&rsquo;s first mass-transit system, proclaimed that &ldquo;Los Angeles is destined to become the most important city in the world.&rdquo;</p>
<p>Of course, builders of other cities – St. Louis, New Orleans, Chicago and even Cincinnati, Ohio – have made similar predictions. But L.A.&rsquo;s claim, unlike the others, had a significant resonance. Not only was the region growing rapidly throughout the previous century, and now stands as North America&rsquo;s second-largest population center, but it dominated a host of fields, notably entertainment and aerospace, and was highly influential in energy, fashion and manufacturing.</p>
<p><!--break--></p>
<p>But it was a connection to the Pacific Rim that made L.A.&rsquo;s ascendency so global. This is something that Midwest rivals, such as Chicago, never enjoyed. By the 1980s, when I was writing my first book, &ldquo;California Inc.,&rdquo; faith in Southern California&rsquo;s global ascendency was commonplace among its business leadership, who almost universally saw the city as rising above New York, London and Tokyo to become the new center of a Pacific-centered world economy.</p>
<p>This notion, and the region&rsquo;s huge economy, has sustained its status among global cities. The 2014 A.T. Kearney global cities index <a href="http://www.atkearney.com/research-studies/global-cities-index/full-report" title="ranked Los Angeles sixth">ranked Los Angeles sixth</a>, behind New York, London, Paris, Tokyo and Hong Kong.</p>
<p>However, a new study of global cities, just released by the Singapore Civil Service College and Chapman University, shifted ranking criteria away from the size of economies or number of business producer service firms and concentrated, instead, on unique factors such as industry domination, diversity and global connectivity.</p>
<p><strong>Hooray for Hollywood</strong></p>
<p>The good news: Los Angeles ranks 10th among global cities, using our new measurement. But L.A.&rsquo;s also clearly not gaining ground on the top two global cities, New York and London, and now ranks below such rising competitors as Beijing and Dubai. L.A. also only shares 10th place, with its primary rival, the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as Toronto.</p>
<p>What is keeping Los Angeles in the top 10? For the most part, the Hollywood connection makes Southern California a &ldquo;necessary&rdquo; place for global business. Hollywood is nearly synonymous with the American entertainment industry and is by far the world&rsquo;s largest in terms of revenue and influence. Last year, the industry enjoyed exports of <a href="http://selectusa.commerce.gov/industry-snapshots/creative-media-industry-united-states" title="almost $15 billion">almost $15 billion</a>. Every major global movie studio is located in Los Angeles.</p>
<p>Yet this industry – growing both nationally and internationally – is also increasingly<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/08/30/l-a-s-mayor-says-states-are-luring-hollywood-away-from-hollywood/" title="dispersing">dispersing</a>. Indeed, this region&rsquo;s share of film and television production has been plummeting in recent years, <a href="http://film.ca.gov/res/docs/CFC%20-Tax%20Credit%20fiscal%20year%20Report%20July%202014.pdf" title="according to the California Film Commission">according to the California Film Commission</a>, largely the result of films and TV moving to Canada, Louisiana and other less-expensive locales.</p>
<p>This is troubling. Before 1980, Southern California&rsquo;s global emergence rested on more than merely being &ldquo;Tinsel Town.&rdquo; It was once the hub of the global aerospace industry, but this former linchpin has declined as both industry headquarters and production have moved away. More than <a href="http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20130921/aerospace-in-southern-california-still-strong-despite-c-17-and-other-losses" title="90,000 aerospace jobs">90,000 aerospace jobs</a> have left Southern California since the end of the Cold War, about 25 years ago.</p>
<p>The region also retains a foothold as the U.S. base in the global auto sector, particularly for design and marketing, for some Asian carmakers. However, Nissan, a few years back, relocated its U.S. headquarters to Nashville, Tenn., and Honda moved some of its top executives to Ohio in order to be nearer to its manufacturing plants.</p>
<p>More devastating is the departure this year from Torrance of the U.S. headquarters for Toyota, the world&rsquo;s largest automobile firm and a consistent technological innovator.</p>
<p>Still, the picture is not totally bleak: Southern California remains the base for North American operations of the two fast-rising Korean firms, Hyundai and Kia, both in Orange County.</p>
<p>One bright spot is technology. Somewhat surprisingly, the Startup Genome project ranked <a href="http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/227832" title="Los Angeles">Los Angeles</a> as having the second strongest startup ecosystem in the United States, ahead of Seattle, Boston and New York. The entrepreneurial spirit is still here, although there&rsquo;s a lack of capital and support from government or nonprofits, elements seen in other regions.</p>
<p>Overall, Southern California has been losing ground to other regions on employment. This was acknowledged even by a recent <a href="http://www.la2020reports.org/reports/A-Time-For-Truth.pdf" title="commission ">commission </a>made up of many of the region&rsquo;s top business and political leaders, which concluded that the region &ldquo;is barely treading water while the rest of the world is moving forward.&rdquo;</p>
<p>And some of these competitors are thriving on what used to be key Southern California industries. Los Angeles was once a center of the energy industry, with several major oil companies – Arco, Union Oil, Getty Oil and Occidental – anchored here. Today, all these firms have either disappeared or moved away. The big winner: Houston, No. 14 on our list, which now dominates energy in the same way L.A. once dominated aerospace and entertainment. Altogether, more than <a href="http://www.houstontx.gov/abouthouston/houstonfacts.html" title="5,000 energy-related companies">5,000 energy-related companies</a> call Houston home.</p>
<p>A more profound challenge comes from the Bay Area, which shares with Southern California both a Pacific Rim location and a pleasant climate. If Hollywood is synonymous with the global entertainment industry, Silicon Valley connotes the same for technology. It is home to companies that overwhelmingly dominate the list of technology leaders, including Intel, Apple, Oracle, Google and Facebook. Many firms, including some from Asia, come with an idea and, as one Malaysian entrepreneur put it, &ldquo;source in Asia, incubate in the U.S.&rdquo;</p>
<p>The Bay Area hosts the North American headquarters of such global tech firms as Samsung and Nokia. Top technology firms in other cities often have their key R&amp;D functions in the Bay Area. Even a penny-pinching firm like Wal-Mart is <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/20/technology/to-catch-up-walmart-moves-to-amazon-turf.html" title="growing its Silicon Valley presence">growing its Silicon Valley presence</a>.</p>
<p>Though Silicon Valley firms are growing their employment base in places like Salt Lake City and Austin, Texas, the Bay Area retains its dominance and control over the industry. This is similar to how the financial industry remains heavily centralized in New York despite the <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/004390-the-cities-stealing-jobs-from-wall-street" title="migration of many jobs">migration of many jobs</a> elsewhere.</p>
<p>As it shifts emphasis more to media, the Bay Area&rsquo;s tech sector increasingly threatens L.A.-oriented industries such as advertising and entertainment. Google and Yahoo already are ranked among the world&rsquo;s largest media companies. (Yahoo refers to itself as a digital media company, rather than a technology company.) With the ubiquity of its iTunes platform, Apple exercises ever-greater control over consumer distribution of entertainment products like music and video; Netflix, Hulu and YouTube could become the movie and television studios of the future. This could shift global media decision-making from its familiar New York-Los Angeles axis to one centered on the Bay Area.</p>
<p>In the future, our region may face powerful competition from Washington, D.C., which has all but stolen the aerospace crown from Southern California. Further down the road, we may also face a challenge from Washington state. Never before a serious competitor, Seattle, with a strong technology sector and name-brand retailers such as Costco, Starbucks and Nordstrom, is growing its global footprint as Southern California&rsquo;s appears to be shrinking. Its twin ports, Tacoma and Seattle, could present a long-term challenge to the still-dominant ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles.</p>
<p>What should be done to retain and improve Southern California&rsquo;s global status? Does anyone still care? The entrepreneurs and promotors who built this region would probably support new infrastructure and regulatory reforms that might bolster the industrial, entertainment and trade sectors.</p>
<p>Sadly, it is dubious that the city&rsquo;s current leadership – focused on trying to build a faux New York or an Ecotopia amid economic decline – even understands the nature of the challenge.</p>
<p>But adopting solutions from the 20th century will not be enough. Los Angeles&rsquo; greatest resource – its diverse, motivated population – has to be allowed to flourish as part of our globalization strategy. Our entrepreneurial ties to Vietnam, China, Mexico, the former Soviet Union and other places could prove critical to restoring our international status.</p>
<p>Great global cities, we need to remember, are created by the people who live there. What we need to do, more than anything, is show that Southern Californians can play a part in reigniting the momentum that once made this region the emerging superstar on the global stage.</p>
<p><em>This piece originally appeared at The Orange County Register.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Distinguished Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. His newest book, The New Class Conflict is now available at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a> and <a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#!/~/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004498-la-hanging-a-top-global-city#commentsUrban IssuesLos AngelesMon, 01 Sep 2014 01:38:04 -0400Joel Kotkin4498 at http://www.newgeography.comThe World's Most Influential Citieshttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004475-the-worlds-most-influential-cities
<p>In the past century, the greatest global cities were generally the largest and centers of the world&rsquo;s great empires: London, Paris, New York and Tokyo. Today size is not so important: Of the world&rsquo;s 10 most populous cities, only Tokyo, New York and Beijing are in the top 10 of our ranking of the world&rsquo;s most important cities. Instead, what matters today is influence.</p>
<p>To rank the world&rsquo;s global cities, I worked with urban geographer Ali Modarres, former Accenture analyst <a href="http://www.urbanophile.com/">Aaron Renn</a> and demographer <a href="http://demographia.com/">Wendell Cox</a>. We have attempted to go beyond some of the standard methods of evaluating the global importance of cities, which include assessing the concentration of support services available for multinationals, such as financial and accounting firms, or the size of the overall economy. Efficiency and access to capital and information, we believe, is more critical to being an important global city than number of jobs, and regional GDP is a false measure, since it doesn&rsquo;t reflect whether the source is domestic or global economic activity.</p>
<p>In order to quantify cities&rsquo; global influence, we looked at eight factors: the amount of foreign direct investment they have attracted; the concentration of corporate headquarters; how many particular business niches they dominate; air connectivity (ease of travel to other global cities); strength of producer services; financial services; technology and media power; and racial diversity. (Click <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2014/08/14/methodology-for-determining-the-worlds-most-influential-cities/">here</a> for a more detailed description of our methodology.) We found those factors particularly important in identifying rising stars that, someday, might challenge the current hegemony of our two top-ranked global cities, London and New York.</p>
<p>Inertia and smart use of it is a key theme that emerged in our evaluation of the top global cities. No city better exemplifies this than London, which after more than a century of imperial decline still ranks No. 1 in our survey. The United Kingdom may now be a second-rate power, but the City&rsquo;s unparalleled legacy as a global financial capital still underpins its pre-eminence.</p>
<p>Ranked first in the world on the Z/Yen Group&rsquo;s 2013 Global Financial Centres Index, which we used for our list, London not only has a long history as a dominant global financial hub, but its location outside the United States and the eurozone keeps it away from unfriendly regulators. Compared to New York, it is also time-zone advantaged for doing business in Asia, and has the second best global air connections of any city after Dubai, with nonstop flights at least three times a week to 89% of global cities outside of its home region of Europe.</p>
<p>A preferred domicile for the global rich, London is not only the historic capital of the English language, which contributes to its status as a powerful media hub and major advertising center, but it&rsquo;s also the birthplace of the cultural, legal and business practices that define global capitalism.London hosts the headquarters of 68 companies on the 2012 Forbes Global 2000 list and is a popular location for the regional HQs of many multinationals. (Our HQ ranking component, in which London ranks third, is based on <a href="http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb430.html">GaWC&rsquo;s 2012 Command and Control Index</a>, which factors in company size and financial performance, as well as total number of Forbes Global 2k HQs).</p>
<p>Beyond these traditional strengths, London has become Europe&rsquo;s <a href="http://gigaom.com/2013/06/21/londons-tech-startup-scene-is-hot-just-dont-compare-it-to-silicon-valley/">top technology startup center</a>, according to the <a href="http://multisite-blog.digital.telefonica.com.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Startup-Eco_14012013.pdf">Startup Genome project</a>. The city has upward of 3,000 tech startup sas well as Google&rsquo;s largest office outside Silicon Valley.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.world-exchanges.org/statistics/domestic-market-capitalization">nearly four times that of second place Tokyo</a> New York, which comes in a close second in our study (40 points to London&rsquo;s 42), is home to most of the world&rsquo;s top investment banks and hedge funds, and the stock trading volume on the city&rsquo;s exchanges is and more than 10 times that of London.</p>
<p>Like London, New York is a global leader in media and advertising, the music industry (home to two of the big three labels), and also one of the most important capitals of the fashion and luxury business. With iconic landmarks galore, international visitors <a href="http://newsroom.mastercard.com/digital-press-kits/mastercard-global-destination-cities-index-2013/">spend more money in New York each year</a> than in any other city in the world.</p>
<p><strong>The Challengers And Those Slowly Fading</strong></p>
<p>London and New York are clearly the leaders but they are not the hegemonic powers that they were throughout much of the 20thcentury, and their main competitors are now largely from outside Europe. Paris may rank third in our survey, but it is way below New York and London by virtually every critical measure, and the city&rsquo;s future is not promising given that France, and much of the EU, are mired in relative economic stagnation.</p>
<p>Rather than a true indication of global reach, Paris&rsquo; high ranking is partly the product of the city&rsquo;s utter domination of the still sizable French economy and the concentration of virtually all the country&rsquo;s leading companies there (it ranks fifth on GaWC&rsquo;s Command and Control Index with 60 HQs of Forbes Global 2K companies).</p>
<p>Elsewhere, Europe boast a veritable archipelago of globally competitive cities — Munich, Rome, Hamburg — but none is large enough, or unique enough, to break into the top 10 in the future. East Asia is likely to place more cities at the top of the list.</p>
<p>For most of the last century, Tokyo has been Asia&rsquo;s leading city. It is still the world&rsquo;s largest city, with the largest overall GDP. In her seminal work on world cities, Saskia Sassen placed it on the same level as London and New York. Tokyo&rsquo;s limitations resemble those of Paris — its high ranking stems partly from the extreme concentration of domestic companies — and it will be handicapped in the future by a severe demographic crisis, a lack of ethnic diversity and very determined regional rivals.</p>
<p><strong>China&rsquo;s Global Cities</strong></p>
<p>China&rsquo;s share of the world economy has grown from 5% in 1994 to 14% in 2012.The combined volume of trading on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges already exceeds that of Tokyo, and Shenzhen&rsquo;s volume is approximately three times that of nearby Hong Kong.</p>
<p>Hong Kong still enjoys greater freedom than the rest of China and remains the largest financial center in the Asia-Pacific region, ranking third in the world after London and New York. The vast majority of the world&rsquo;s major investment banks, asset managers, and insurance companies maintain their Asia-Pacific headquarters in the former British colony.</p>
<p>But its preeminence is being threatened by Shanghai, traditionally Hong Kong&rsquo;s chief rival, and Beijing. We ranked China&rsquo;s capital eighth, ahead of Shanghai (19th). With the advantage of being the country&rsquo;s all-powerful political center, Beijing is the headquarters of most large state-owned companies and is home to the country&rsquo;s elite educational institutions and its most innovative companies.</p>
<p>But right now the leading global city in East Asia is Singapore, which ranks fourth on our list. With a relatively small population of just over 5 million, Singapore&rsquo;s basic infrastructure is <a href="http://blog.ctsi-global.com/post/2013/06/21/singapores-infrastructure-ranked-best-in-the-world.aspx">among the best on the planet</a>. Like Hong Kong, it also benefits from a tradition of British governance and law, one reason the World Bank ranked its business climate the world&rsquo;s best; China ranked 96th. Singapore&rsquo;s justice system is ranked 10th in the world in <a href="http://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/files/wjp_rule_of_law_index_2014_report.pdf">The Rule of Law Index</a>.</p>
<p>That is all drawing in international business: Singapore places first among global cities in our ranking of foreign direct investment, with a five-year average of 359 greenfield transactions. It&rsquo;s a favored location in many industries for Asia-Pacific headquarters; a <a href="http://www.rolandberger.com/media/publications/2011-04-11-rbsc-pub-Asia_Pachttp://www.cnbc.com/id/44084372/page/1">study by the consultancy Roland Berger</a> named Singapore the leading location for European companies to establish an Asia-Pacific HQs.</p>
<p>Singapore vies with Hong Kong as the financial center of Asia, ranking fourth in the world in that category.</p>
<p><strong>Global Capital of the Middle East</strong></p>
<p>Much of what we see in the media about Middle Eastern cities are scenes of destruction and chaos. Yet in a relatively quiet corner of the Arabian Peninsula, Dubai is ascending, ranked seventh on our list. Its globalization strategy hinges largely on its expanding airport, which includes the world&rsquo;s largest terminal and an even larger airport under construction. It ranks first in the world in our air connectivity ranking, with nonstop flights at least three times a week to 93% of global cities outside of its home region.Its hub location and business-friendly climate have made it a favorite for companies looking to establish a Middle East headquarters or point of presence. As a crossroads of humanity, Dubai is unparalleled among global cities for its diversity: 86% of its residents are foreign born.</p>
<p><strong>North America</strong></p>
<p>Our rankings rewarded cities that are both ethnically diverse and, in some cases, dominate a critical industry. This is what we refer to as a &ldquo;necessary city,&rdquo; a place one must go to conduct business in a particular field, or to service a particular region of the world.</p>
<p>This focus on the &ldquo;necessary&rdquo; city led to what will no doubt be a controversial result: a 10th place ranking for the San Francisco Bay Area, on the strength of its central role in the tech industry, tied on our list with Los Angeles and Toronto. The Bay Area did not even make the top 20 in the 2014 <a href="http://www.atkearney.com/research-studies/global-cities-index/full-report">A.T. Kearney rankings</a>, which placed both Chicago and Los Angeles in the top 10.</p>
<p>Not long ago Los Angeles, North America&rsquo;s second-largest metro area, saw itself as a potential rival to New York and a legitimate world city. Hollywood is nearly synonymous with the American entertainment industry and is by far the world&rsquo;s largest in terms of revenue and influence. Last year the industry enjoyed exports of almost $15 billion.</p>
<p>But L.A.&rsquo;s share of entertainment employment <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/08/30/l-a-s-mayor-says-states-are-luring-hollywood-away-from-hollywood/">is shrinking</a> and its former second industry, aerospace, has declined significantly, <a href="http://www.dailybreeze.com/business/20130921/aerospace-in-southern-california-still-strong-despite-c-17-and-other-losses">losing over 90,000 jobs</a> since the end of the Cold War. Several key companies have decamped from the metro area in recent years — Nissan, Occidental Petroleum, Toyota — for more business-friendly places.</p>
<p>The situation is arguably worse in Chicago, which ties for 20th. The Windy City first rose to world prominence after overcoming rival St. Louis in the late 19th century. It boasts one of the world&rsquo;s most diverse economies, but has not developed strong dominance in any industry. Chicago is an also ran in media and technology and, outside of commodities, is no longer a major global financial center.</p>
<p>The big winner today is the Bay Area, which overwhelmingly dominates the list of technology leaders; not only is the metro area home to a glittering array of tech standouts, companies based elsewhere in the U.S., and in other countries, feel compelled to site operations there. Even a penny pinching retailer like Wal-Mart <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/20/technology/to-catch-up-walmart-moves-to-amazon-turf.html">is growing its Silicon Valley presence</a>.</p>
<p>Other North American cities with a growing global footprint include 10th ranked Toronto, tied with Los Angeles and Bay Area. Toronto, as the economic capital of Canada, has becomes a focus for international investment into that stable and resource rich country. It is also among the most diverse cities on the planet — 46 % of its population is foreign born.</p>
<p><strong>Rising Stars</strong></p>
<p>In North America up and comers include No. 14 Houston, with its domination of the U.S. energy industry, a huge export sector and an increasingly diverse population. The Washington, D.C., metro area ranks 16th, a testament to the capital&rsquo;s growth as an aerospace and technology center.</p>
<p>Overseas, other urban centers that could move up in the future include No. 16 Seoul, Shanghai and No. 20 (tie) Abu Dhabi. But outside of Dubai no other cities in our top 20 come from the developing world. The Indian megacities Delhi and Mumbai rank in the low 30s along with Johannesburg in South Africa. In Latin America, the place to watch is No. 23 Sao Paulo. But until these areas can develop adequate infrastructure — from roads, transit and bridges to relatively non-corrupt judicial systems — none can be expected to crack the top 10, or even 20, for at least a decade.</p>
<p>For the time being, the future of the global city belongs not to the biggest or fastest growing but the most efficient and savvy, and those with a strong historical pedigree. This raises the bar for all cities that wish to break into this elite club.</p>
<h2>No. 1: London</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 328<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 68<<br>Air Connectivity: 89%*<br>Global Financial Centres Index Rank: 1</p>
<p>* The air connectivity score is the percentage of other global cities outside the city&rsquo;s region (e.g., for London, cities outside of Europe) that can be reached nonstop a minimum of three times per week.</p>
<h2>No. 2: New York</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 143<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 82<br>Air Connectivity: 70%<br>GFCI Rank: 2</p>
<h2>No. 3: Paris</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 129<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 60<br>Air Connectivity: 81%<br>GFCI Rank: 29</p>
<h2>No. 4: Singapore</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 359<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: N/A<br>Air Connectivity: 46%<br>GFCI Rank: 4</p>
<h2>No. 5: Tokyo</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 83<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 154<br>Air Connectivity: 59%<br>GFCI Rank: 5</p>
<h2>No. 6: Hong Kong</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 234<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 48<br>Air Connectivity: 57%<br>GFCI Rank: 3</p>
<h2>No. 7: Dubai</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 245<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: N/A<br>Air Connectivity: 93%<br>GFCI Rank: 25</p>
<h2>No. 8 (TIE): Beijing</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 142<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 45<br>Air Connectivity: 65%<br>GFCI Rank: 59</p>
<h2>No. 8 (TIE): Sydney</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 111<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 21<br>Air Connectivity: 43%<br>GFCI Rank: 15</p>
<h2>No. 10 (TIE): Los Angeles</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 35<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: N/A<br>Air Connectivity: 46%<br>GFCI Rank: N/A</p>
<h2>No. 10 (TIE): San Francisco Bay Area</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 49<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 17<br>Air Connectivity: 38%<br>GFCI Rank: 12</p>
<h2>No. 10 (TIE): Toronto</h2>
<p>FDI Transactions (5-Year Avg.): 60<br>Forbes Global 2000 HQs: 23<br>Air Connectivity: 49%<br>GFCI Rank: 11</p>
<h2>Remaining Cities</h2>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="490">
<tr>
<td nowrap valign="bottom"><strong>City</strong></td>
<td nowrap valign="bottom"><strong>Region</strong></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom" nowrap><strong>Rank</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Zurich</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">13</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Frankfurt</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">14</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Houston</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">14</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Amsterdam/Randstad</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">16</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Seoul</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">16</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Washington Metropolitan Area</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">16</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Shanghai</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">19</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Abu Dhabi</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Middle East</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">20</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Chicago</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">20</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Moscow</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">20</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Boston</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">23</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Brussels</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">23</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Dallas-Fort Worth</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">23</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Madrid</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">23</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Melbourne</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">23</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>São Paulo</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>South America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">23</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Istanbul</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Middle East</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">29</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Miami</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">29</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Johannesburg</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Africa</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">31</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Kuala Lumpur</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">31</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Mumbai</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">31</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Bangkok</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">34</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Delhi</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">34</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Geneva</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">34</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Atlanta</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">37</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Berlin</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">37</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Seattle </p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">37</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Tel Aviv</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Middle East</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">37</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Mexico City</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">41</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Milan</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Europe</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">41</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Montreal</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">41</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Buenos Aires</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>South America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">44</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Jakarta</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">44</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Philadelphia</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>North America</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">44</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Cairo</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Middle East</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">47</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Guangzhou</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">47</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Ho Chi Minh City</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">47</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Lagos</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Africa</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">47</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="255" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Osaka</p>
</td>
<td width="167" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p>Asia-Pacific</p>
</td>
<td width="68" nowrap valign="bottom">
<p align="center">47</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><em>This piece originally appeared at Forbes.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Distinguished Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. His newest book, The New Class Conflict is now available for pre-order at<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091438628X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=091438628X&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20">Amazon</a> and <a href="http://www.telospress.com/store/#!/~/product/category=4186633&amp;id=38310927">Telos Press</a>. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515">The City: A Global History</a> and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
<p><em>Photo: &quot;<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jikatu/8013372310/">City of London skyline at dusk</a>&quot; by jikatu - Licensed under <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:City_of_London_skyline_at_dusk.jpg#mediaviewer/File:City_of_London_skyline_at_dusk.jpg">Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons</a></em><a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:City_of_London_skyline_at_dusk.jpg#mediaviewer/File:City_of_London_skyline_at_dusk.jpg"></a></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004475-the-worlds-most-influential-cities#commentsUrban IssuesDemographicsEconomicsLondonLos AngelesNew YorkFri, 15 Aug 2014 01:38:06 -0400Joel Kotkin4475 at http://www.newgeography.comCalifornia Drought: How To Share An Emergencyhttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004468-how-to-share-emergency-californias-drought
<p>California has big troubles. It hasn’t rained for two years. Our reservoirs are almost depleted. Our aquifers are being overdrawn. Forecasts for next winter’s rain, which were optimistic not long ago, have become increasingly pessimistic. </p>
<p>Of course, everybody knows California is in a drought. So, California is doing things. We have education programs. We have <a href=http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/california-drought/drought-shaming-apps-target-california-water-wasters-n167651">shaming apps</a> and neighbors reporting on neighbors. We have <a href="http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Water-California--board-Fine-Drought-266362181.html">fines</a> for water wasters. We have <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_26191180/california-drought-water-cops-being-hired-by-bay">Water Cops</a>. We have the <a href="http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_26254396/x2018-lawn-dude-x2019-brings-drought-tips-digital">Lawn Dude</a>. </p>
<p>Still, Californians underestimate the drought’s total cost. </p>
<p>The drought’s environmental costs are especially underappreciated. It is an environmental disaster. When water gets tight, <a href="http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/07/24/3764159/drought-starting-to-kill-salmon.html">fish</a>, <a href="http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Birds-May-Nudge-Toward-Extinction-as-Californias-Severe-Drought-Impacts-Nature-Preserve-267412101.html">birds</a>, and other wildlife suffer. We see increasing numbers of confrontations between snakes and <a href="http://pasoroblesdailynews.com/rattlesnakes-increased-problem-slo-county/24869/">predators</a>, like mountain lions and bears, and people. Animals l ose most of these confrontations. In some areas, we are losing entire riparian and wetland ecosystems.</p>
<p>Ocean water is intruding into coastal groundwater basins. Nitrate and sulfate levels in drinking water are rising, and in some areas exceed levels permitted by public health standards.</p>
<p>Even the land is changing. Persistent aquifer overdrafts are causing land to <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/california-drought/californians-pump-groundwater-land-sinks-aquifers-shrink-n145466">sink</a>. Infrastructure and buildings, breaking under the strain of sinking land, will need to be rebuilt or repaired. All these factors increase the costs of the drought. Worse, once an aquifer is collapsed, it can never be restored. Our storage capacity is permanently reduced. Persistent aquifer overdrafts may even increase the frequency of earthquakes.</p>
<p>Over-drafting of aquifers needs to stop. Riparian and wetland habitats need to be maintained. The price that water users pay should reflect all costs.</p>
<p>California’s current response is increasing the drought’s costs. Education programs are expensive. So are water cops and the systems to prosecute and punish profligate water users. And yet, water usage has not significantly decreased.</p>
<p>Some costs are immeasurable. A society with water cops driving around looking for people watering their lawns, where neighbors shame each other on social media or report neighbors to authorities, starts to look oppressive. The mutual trust necessary for an efficient and well-ordered society starts to erode.</p>
<p>The damage could be far less. Nixon made the OPEC oil shocks worse by capping prices and using coercive government tools to reduce demand. This is exactly what California is doing with water. Demand exceeds supply. The price to users is too low. </p>
<p>It would be simpler to let water prices rise to a market-clearing price. This would quickly reduce aquifer overdrafts, while leaving sufficient water to support ecosystems and the species they support. It would also mean that most Californians would see prices increase a lot. </p>
<p>This proposal tends to drive people crazy, yet we allocate few resources the way we allocate water.</p>
<p>Consider that life-giving resource, coffee. Between January and April of 2014, coffee bean prices increased 72 percent on global markets. The United States retail price rose about 33 percent. The price increases reflected a drought in Brazil. Coffee consumers did not need to have detailed information about South American weather patterns. The price provided all they needed to know. </p>
<p>Consider gasoline, too. In a market where powerful cartels manipulate global supplies, the price of gasoline conveys detailed signals about the state of global supply. Whether a large refinery in California is temporarily shuttered, or political unrest roils a Middle East oil producer, consumers can stay abreast of changing conditions by observing price changes at the pump. </p>
<p>Why not with water?</p>
<p>Many people object on fairness grounds, arguing that water is a necessity, and market prices would deny that necessity to poor people. Others object on legal grounds, arguing that our water prices are a complex result of history, legal precedent, and sometimes contradictory laws. Still others object to leaving some water for animals and plants while people suffer.</p>
<p>The fairness argument is easy to dismiss. The price that matters is the price of the last gallon sold. We could easily give everyone some minimum allocation of water for free (or nearly-free) and then charge a market-clearing price for everything beyond that. </p>
<p>Voilà! Problem solved. No oppressive government measures. </p>
<p>This system is employed in Tucson, Arizona. There, steep block pricing has allowed the city to allocate scarce water to vitally important uses. One need only compare an image of Tucson homes to one of Phoenix homes to see the strategy’s effectiveness. In Phoenix, where flat-rate pricing is used, you occasionally see residential landscaping a Seattle home owner would envy. In Tucson, it’s all cactus and rock gardens. </p>
<p>The argument against leaving water for plants and animals relies on the concept that people are more important than other living things. We don’t need to debate that. It’s only important in a situation where human life is at stake, and California's water situation is not a threat to mankind. Twenty-first century America is fabulously wealthy. Leaving some water for the critters may cost us, but we can pay it and still have a standard of living that most of mankind throughout history would have envied.</p>
<p>The legal objection is also easy to challenge. Fortunately for all of us, California's water laws weren't brought down from Mount Sinai by Moses, and, like the Commandments, they are routinely violated. Most of California's water law, with the exception of transfer and resale legislation, is pretty good. The problem is that it isn't being enforced. </p>
<p>Assertion of the existing laws can improve the situation. Only 23 of California’s approximately 400 groundwater basins have undergone "adjudication". Generally, adjudicated basins are models of efficient allocation. Water prices in these jurisdictions are connected to supply and demand and are also, predictably, significantly higher than in non-adjudicated basins. </p>
<p>There are two important issues with California's water laws that need to be addressed. One relates to owners of agricultural land; they are entitled to "reasonable and beneficial use" of water under the land. This is called an "overlying right." Unfortunately, they’re not allowed to sell or transfer the water to other users. This needs to change. </p>
<p>Another is that the California Environmental Quality Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the State Water Resources Control Board prevent the building of the infrastructure that's required to move water. About 75 percent of California’s supply of water originates north of Sacramento, while 75 percent of California’s demand for water originates south of Sacramento. Water needs to move, and the California State Water Project is insufficient to allow local and regional transfers. <a href="http://www.northernwater.org/">Northern Colorado</a> and parts of <a href="http://www.thefreshwatertrust.org/">Oregon</a> provide examples of regions that effectively transfer water between users. </p>
<p>Asserting California's existing water laws and changing inefficient parts of those laws are revolutionary ideas, and a first-order political challenge. To do so would require leadership and courage, two characteristics that are almost non-existent in American political leadership. It's worth the effort. It would fundamentally improve California's future.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, it could take five to ten years, a time frame not conducive to managing today’s emergency. Californians need to understand that we have a crisis, and we need to act now.</p>
<p><i>Matthew Fienup teaches graduate econometrics and works for the Center for Economic Research and Forecasting at California Lutheran University, where he specializes in applied econometric analysis and the economics of land use. He is currently working on his PhD at the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management at the University of California Santa Barbara. He holds a Masters Degree in Economics from UCSB. Bill Watkins is a professor at California Lutheran University and runs the Center for Economic Research and Forecasting, which can be found at <a href="http://www.clucerf.org/">clucerf.org</a></p>
<p>Flickr photo by M. Dolly, <a href=" https://flic.kr/p/bQNBNk">California Garden</a>: "Hacking out the lawn and replacing it with drought tolerant and native plants... Best decision ever! Shown here: Abutilon palmeri - Indian Mallow, and Salvia mellifera - Black Sage."</i> </p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004468-how-to-share-emergency-californias-drought#commentsCaliforniaEconomicsLos AngelesEnvironmentWed, 13 Aug 2014 11:08:24 -0400Matthew Fienup and Bill Watkins4468 at http://www.newgeography.comDon't be so Dense About Housinghttp://www.newgeography.com/content/004448-dont-be-so-dense-about-housing
<p>Southern California faces a <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/004071-los-angeles-will-the-city-of-the-future-make-it-there" title="crisis of confidence">crisis of confidence</a>. A region that once imagined itself as a new model of urbanity – what the early 20th century minister and writer Dana Bartlett called &ldquo;the better city&rdquo; – is increasingly being told that, to succeed, it must abandon its old model and become something more akin to dense Eastern cities, or to Portland or San Francisco.</p>
<p>This has touched off a &ldquo;density craze,&rdquo; in which developers and regulators work overtime to create a future dramatically different from the region&rsquo;s past. This kind of social engineering appeals to many pundits, planners and developers, but may scare the dickens out of many residents.<!--break--> They may also be concerned that the political class, rather than investing in improving our neighborhoods, seems determined to use our dollars to <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/04/local/la-me-la-tax-breaks-20110504" title="subsidize densification and support vanity projects">subsidize densification and support vanity projects</a>, like a new Downtown Los Angeles <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/01/should-la-provide-a-public-subsidy-to-build-downtown-football-stadium.html" title="football stadium">football stadium</a>. At same time, policymakers seek to all but <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/002781-california-declares-war-suburbia-ii-the-cost-radical-densification" title="ban suburban building">ban suburban building</a>, a misguided and extraordinarily costly extension of their climate-change agenda.</p>
<p>This effort works against the region&rsquo;s basic DNA. Our Downtown, for all its promotion, is not a dominant business or cultural center. It accounts for barely 1/10th the share of regional employment that Manhattan – at more than 20 percent – provides for its region and less than one-sixth the share of regional jobs accounted for by San Francisco, less than one-third that of much-maligned, spread-out Houston.</p>
<p>Some people contend that, by investing heavily in mass transit, we can re-engineer our region towards a more-19th century model, which Los Angeles, as a 20th century city, never had. Some, like economics and political blogger <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_pivot/2012/09/l_a_metro_how_los_angeles_is_becoming_america_s_next_great_mass_transit_city_.html" title="Matt Yglesias">Matt Yglesias</a>, suggest Los Angeles&rsquo; $8 billion-plus investment in rail is making it the &ldquo;the next great transit city.&rdquo;</p>
<p>Well, after 30 years of relentless spending on subways and light rail, the share of transit commuters in the region (comprising Los Angeles and Orange counties, the Inland Empire and Ventura County) is about where it was in 1980 – roughly 5 percent – compared with greater New York&rsquo;s 27 percent or Chicago&rsquo;s 11 percent.</p>
<p><strong>Village people</strong></p>
<p>Transit has limited effect in Southern California because this region functions best as a network of &ldquo;villages,&rdquo; some more urban than others, connected primarily by freeways and an enviable arterial street system. Inside our villages, we can find the human scale and comfort that can be so elusive in a megacity. This arrangement allows many Southern Californians to live in a quiet neighborhood that also is within one of the world&rsquo;s most diverse – and important – cities.</p>
<p>These villages span all the vast diversity of Southern California. Some areas, like Downtown Los Angeles, increasingly appeal to young professionals who seek a version of dense urban living. They share a universe with cohorts found in many older cities: young hipsters, a small sample of empty nesters and a sizable population of homeless who l<a href="http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2014/07/la_cop_skid_row_in_a_ment.php" title="ive on the edges of the gentrification zone">ive on the edges of the gentrification zone</a>.</p>
<p>But Downtown hardly provides a template for the rest of the region. Mostly we live in lower-density villages, many of which – in the San Gabriel Valley, East Los Angeles, Santa Ana, Westminster and L.A.&rsquo;s Leimart Park, for example – reflect largely ethnic cultures with deeply established roots.</p>
<p>Even newer areas, like <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/001988-irvine-design" title="Irvine ">Irvine </a>– which still ranks among America&rsquo;s <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003779-americas-fastest-growing-cities-since-the-recession" title="fastest-growing cities ">fastest-growing cities </a>– are now majority Asian and Latino. Irvine&rsquo;s appeal is largely the much- dissed suburban virtues of clean streets, good parks and excellent schools.</p>
<p>Some areas are almost insanely eclectic. My neighborhood in the San Fernando Valley – sometimes referred to as Valley Village or Valley Glen – includes many people in the film and television business, but is increasingly dominated by Orthodox Jews, Armenians and Israelis. In summer, barely clad acting folk pass Orthodox <em>haredim</em> dressed in impossibly warm black suits and hats.</p>
<p>Walk one direction from my house, and you run into Armenian businesses, including a<em>lavash</em> bakery and several kabob restaurants. Walk the other direction, and you enter a<em>kashrut</em> world, with signs in both English and Hebrew; you even can get panhandled by an odd Jewish beggar, something you encounter in Israel and parts of Brooklyn but not too often in California.</p>
<p><strong>Outdoor living</strong></p>
<p>What holds these neighborhoods together is a desire for a particular quality of life, usually associated with the single-family home. These, along with modestly sized garden apartments, long have been the primary choice of Southern Californians. Such housing facilitates enjoying this region&rsquo;s arguably greatest asset: its weather. Residents value a place for backyard barbecues, swimming pools, small soccer pitches for the kids and an element of seclusion.</p>
<p>Unable to afford the pricier L.A. or O.C. neighborhoods, many Southern Californians, to the consternation of the urban planners and some developers, head for a newer village on the <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/002372-the-evolving-urban-form-los-angeles" title="regional periphery">regional periphery</a>. Indeed, more than 99 percent of the region&rsquo;s growth has taken place far from central L.A. For every yuppie who moves Downtown, or into now-fashionable closer-in neighborhoods, a hundred or more move out to Rancho Cucamonga, Valencia, Mission Viejo or scores of other outlying communities.</p>
<p><em>This article first appeared in the Orange County Register.</em></p>
<p><em>Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and Distinguished Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. He is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375756515/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=0375756515" rel="nofollow">The City: A Global History</a> and </em><em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B1BN90/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=newgeogrcom-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=B005B1BN90" rel="nofollow">The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050</a></em><em>. His most recent study, <a href="http://www.newgeography.com/content/003133-the-rise-post-familialism-humanitys-future" rel="nofollow">The Rise of Postfamilialism</a>, has been widely discussed and distributed internationally. He lives in Los Angeles, CA.</em></p>
http://www.newgeography.com/content/004448-dont-be-so-dense-about-housing#commentsUrban IssuesMiddle ClassCaliforniaHousingLos AngelesPlanningSuburbsPolicyTue, 29 Jul 2014 01:38:17 -0400Joel Kotkin4448 at http://www.newgeography.com